Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n act_n believe_v faith_n 1,884 5 5.9965 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A30248 The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially Antinomians in XXX lectures preached at Lawrence-Iury, London / by Anthony Burgess ... Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664. 1651 (1651) Wing B5663; ESTC R21442 243,318 299

There are 10 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

is not to make a difference of sin 212 213 A three-fold difference between the sins of a godly and wicked man 232 233 Seeing and knowing how they differ 90 No difference to our capacity between Gods seeing and knowing 91 A two-fold difference between Gods forgiving our sins and our forgiving others 113 114. The Properties of God and the actions of them how they differ p. 97 Justification and pardon of sinne how they differ 257 The sense of Gods displeasure for sin may be retained in us two wayes servilely filially 22 The Antinomian distinction examined 89 90 Believers have not a full discharge from sin till the day of Judgement 256 It is the duty of justified persons to pray for pardon and for forgiveness of sin 113 It is the duty of Believers to repent of sinne that it may be pardoned and why 114 E Election is Amor ordinativus non o●ll●ti●us 188 In what sense an elect man before conversion is loved of God ●88 God hath other ends then to satisfie his Justice when he afflicts his people 26 There are many errors about Justification and the danger of them 4 The ground of Popish errors about Justification 5 The errors of Papists Antinomians concerning remission of sinne 43 44 45 The errors of the Saints displeasing to God 80 81 Who they are which do esteem of pardon of sin and why 221 222 Why Creation and Justification are not from Eternity 167 How sin doth and how it doth not expell the Grace of Justification 243 F How the word Face is attributed to God 226 All men called flesh 1 A two-fold Faith in all Petitions Applicative Fiducial 61 Forgivenes is the removing the guilt though not the nature of sin 45 Prayer for and faith in God for forgiveness may well stand together 62 God doth reiterate forgivenss of sin 127 Christians ought to pray for forgiveness and in what sense 129. from 113. to 116 Forbearance of punishment differs from forgiveness 143 144 What forgiveness of sin is 214 Whether God in forgiving sin doth forgive all sin together 244 245 The meaning of the Petition Forgive us our Debts declared in eight particulars 113 to 118 How freedom is extended to God 96 G The Glory of God what 2 The nature of Gospel-grace 253 Great sins as we●l as lesser are forgiven the godly 51 Two considerations which will much help us to see the greatness of our sins 204 Gross sins procure wrath to the godly 208 Gross sins exclude from the society of the Church ibid. Gross sins require many conditions before pardoned 209 Gross sins require a more intense act of faith to apply pardon 210 A godly man falling into gross sins is under sequestration though not ejection 238 Why the guilt of new gross sins doth not take away Justification 243 244 H Hay and stubble 1 Cor. 3. what 81 Humiliation and Repentance denied by the Antinomians 59 125 A Christian is to be humbled more for gross sins then ordinary infirmities 208 209 Hyperbolical expressions of the Fathers 250 I Five things implied from the subject praying Forgive us our debts Mat. 6.12 1. That all are sinners 2. A sense of sin 3. Godly sorrow 4. Earnestnesse and perseve●ance until we obtain 5. Constant renewed acts of faith 121 to 125 Three things implied in the object matter Mat. 6.12 125 126 The act of imputation and the ground of it how they differ 185 There is a two-fold impulsive cause of Justification 2 Justification what it implieth 6 How Infants are justified whether without faith or no 181 182 183 How Christ is in us and we in him 184 A man is not justified untill he doth repent and believe 12 Wherein Justification consists 17 How Justification can be said to be the pardon of sin ibid. Whether the Justification of Believers be the same under the old and new Testament 62 How sin is injurious to God 164 How we are justified before faith 177 Justification and faith are correlatives 183 God cannot in Justice but punish sinners 98 The Justice of God admits of a surety 200 The Justice of God essentially ad intra and the effects ad extra how differ ibid. Four Propositions shewing the nature and time of a believers Justification 257 258 259 Justification is not reiterated 115 K Gods Knowledge and ours how they differ 89 90 L How Gods taking notice of sin to punish it is subject to the meer Liberty of his will 95. to 102 God takes notice of little sins 79 M Whether the sins of Gods people shall be manifested at the last day 261 262 The Ministers of God commanded to binde and retain sins 65 The spirit doth mortifie our sins 56 External and spiritual mortification how differing 57 Sin is mortified in us not only declaratively but really ibid. N The Nature of Justification 116 117 The nature of sin what and how expressed in Scripture 130 131 132 The nature of the sins of Gods people 230 231 Faith and Repentance how necessary to the pardon of sin 140 141 God takes notice of the sins of believers 60 1●9 O The answering of Objections sometimes profitable 41 42 Antinomian Objections and distinctions discussed 88. to 102 An Obligation to punishment follows sinne long before committed 137 139 False Opinions liable to the anger of God proved 80 81 Habitual original sin how truly it may be called sin 132 The original of justification and assurance 171 172 173 The Orthodox truth concerning afflictions upon a justified person against the errors of Antinomians and Papists ●6 P Pardon of sin is not only privative b●t positive 118 Five Reasons proving that the sense of pardon doth not beget carnal security 267. Five Reasons why God doth sometimes pardon sin and not manifest it to the soul 199 200 Whether the sins of believers be pardoned before they be committed 246 Eight Arguments proving they are not 247 to 253 Three Directions to a soul tempted about the pardon of sin 122 Our sins are perfectly pardoned in this life 258 Whether God by his absolute power may not pardon sin without the graces of faith and repentance 148 Peace with God what it is 34 35 Whether in that Petition Mat. 5.12 we pray for pardon and assurance 116 117 196 Four Reasons proving that we pray for the pardon it self and not only for assurance 196 Four sorts of men praying for pardon and the manner of their praying 195 196 197 Four Reasons proving that not only assurance but the pardon it self is to be prayed for 197 Who are the best Preachers of Christ and the Gospel 122 The Promises of God require an holy and humble walking 172 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what is signifieth 2 Thirteen Propositions to clear the nature of Justification 3. to 13 Nine Propositions for the understanding the nature of pardon of sin 18. to 22 Seven Propositions laid down to clear the truth of that assertion that God doth afflict his people as a Father 27 28 29 30 A
pardon can never be called an inherent righteousnesse or a qualitative Justice but rather it opposeth it but it may be called a Legal or Judicial righteousnesse because God for the obedience and satisfaction of Christ doth account of us as righteous having pardoned our sin and withall imputing Christs righteousnesse to us both which make up our Justification For the understanding therefore of the first particular viz. Remission of sins take these Propositions which will be the foundation upon which many material questions will be built 1. That forgivenes of sin is possible there may be and is such a thing Hence in that ancient Creed we are said to believe a remission of sins where faith is described not in the meer historical acts of it but fiducial the remission of my sins Now this is some stay to a troubled sinner that his sins may be forgiven whereas the devils cannot God no where saying to them Repent and believe And although Salmeron holdeth that God gave the lapsed Angels space to repent before they were peremptorily adjudged unto their everlasting torments yet he hath scarce a guide or companion in that opinion were not therefore this true that there is such a thing in the Church of God as forgivenes of sin How much better had it been for us if we had never been born 2. Consider That a sin may be said to be forgiven divers wayes First in the decree and purpose of God as Christ is called the Lamb slain from the beginning Though I do not know where the Scripture useth such an expression yet the Antinomians build much upon it Secondly A sin may be said to be forgiven in Christ meritoriously when God laid the sins of his people upon him which the Prophet Isaiah doth describe as plainly Isa 53. as any Evangelist hence some have called Isaiah the fifth Evangelist Now you must not conclude such a mans sins are pardoned because they are laid upon Christ a long while ago which is the Antinomians perpetual panalogizing for to this effect of remission of sin there go more causes besides the meritorious faith the instrumental cause which is as necessary in its kinde for this great benefit as the meritorious cause is in its kind that though Christ hath born such a mans sins yet they are not pardoned till he do believe for as the grace of God which is the efficient cause of pardon doth not make a sin compleatly forgiven without the meritorious cause so neither doth the meritorious without the instrumental but there is a necessity of the presence and the co-operation of all these Thirdly A sin is said to be pardoned when the guilt is taken away and this is properly Remission of iniquities Fourthly Sin is pardoned in our sense and feeling when God takes away all our fears and doubts giving us an assurance of his love And lastly Sin is forgiven when the temporal affliction is removed and in this sense the Scripture doth much use the word forgivenesse of sins and his not pardoning is when he will punish 3. There are several things considerable in sin when we say it is forgiven First In sin there is a privation of that innocency which he had before as when a man is proud by that act of pride he is deprived of that innocency and freedom from that guilt which he had before This is properly true of Adam who lost his innocency by sinning It cannot be affirmed of us but in a limited sense thus far that when a man commits a sin that guilt may be charged upon him whereof he was innocent before Now when sin is forgiven the sense is not that he is made innocent again for that can never be helped but that it must be affirm'd such an one hath sin'd this cannot be repaired again It is true the Scripture useth such expressions That iniquity shall be sought for and there shall be found none Jer. 51.20 But that is in respect of the consequence of it We shal have as much joy and peace as if we had not sinned at all A 2d thing in sin is the dignity desert it hath of the wrath of God and this is inseparable from any sin if it be a sin there is a desert of damnation thus all the sins of the godly howsoever they shall not actually condemn them yet they have a desert of condemnation Thirdly There is the actual ordination and obligation of the person sinning to everlasting condemnation and forgivenes of sin doth properly lie in this not in taking away the desert of the guilt of sin but the actual ordination of it to condemnation Therefore its false that is affirmed by some that reatus est forma peccati guilt is the form of a sin for a sin may be truly a sin and yet this actual ordination of it to death taken away Fourthly There is in sin an offence done unto God or an enmity to him so that now he is displeased and this is taken away in some measure by forgivenesse yet so as his anger is not fully removed If we speak exactly God doth not punish his children yet as a Father he is angry with them and that makes him to chastise them though the sin be forgiven Fifthly In sinne is likewise a blo● or pollution whereby the soul loseth its former beauty and excellency and this is not removed by remission but by sanctification and renovation Hence it is ordinarily said that Justification hath a relative being only but Renovation an absolute inherent change And lastly In all sin there is an aversion from God either Habitual in Habitual sins or Actual in Actual and in this aversion from God the soul abideth till it be turned to him again as a man that turneth his back on the Sun continueth so till he turn himself again now Conversion and not Justification doth rectifie this so that by this you may see what it is to have a sin forgiven not the foulnes or the disformity of it to Gods Law removed nor yet the dignity and desert of Gods wrath no nor all kinde of anger from God but the actual ordination of it to condemnation 4. There is a great difference between original sin and actuals for that of original is much more perplexed in the matter of remission then those of actuals when an actual sin is committed the act is transient that is quickly passed away there remaineth only the guilt which sticketh till God by pardon doth remove it and then when he hath forgiven it there is all of that sin past But now in original sin it is otherwise for that corruption adhering to us cleaving to our nature like Ivie to the tree as the Father expresseth it though it be forgiven yet it still continueth and that not only as an exercise of our faith and prayers or by way of a penal langu●r upon us but truly and
Blesse the Lord O my soul who forgiveth all thine iniquities This particular assurance inlarged his heart to praises But although this be part of the sense in this Petition yet this is not all we pray for as the Antinomian contends for we pray principally for the real exhibition of pardon and secondarily for the Declaration and manifestation of it in our consciences Their conceit is That God from all eternity hath pardoned our sins past present and to come and that when we believe or repent our sins are pardoned declaratively only to our conscience they being forgiven before This I shall handle in a Question by it self Only I shall lay down some few Arguments to prove that we do not only pray for assurance and manifestation of pardon but also for pardon it self The reasons are these First We might by the same rule interpret all the other Petitions in regard of Declaration only and not exhibition when we pray for sanctification and glorification in that Petition Thy Kingdom come it might be as well said that we were sanctified and glorified from all eternity and therefore when we are converted or saved in heaven this is but to our sense and feeling This Argument seemeth to be so strong against them that they have confest A man is already glorified while he is upon earth most absurdly confounding the Decrees of God from eternity to do things with the executions of them in time How ridiculous would it be to expound that Petition Give us our daily bread thus Not that God should give us daily bread but only make us to see and feel that he hath given it us A second reason is from the nature of forgivenesse of sin When sinne is pardoned it is said to be blotted out now that blotting out is not only from a mans conscience and feeling but more immediately out of Gods Book So that when God doth forgive he doth cancel those debts which are in his Book and not only the guilt that lieth upon our hearts therefore these are very separable the one from the other A man may feel no weight or burden of sin upon him and yet it stand in fiery Characters against him in Gods Book and on the contrary a sin may be blotted out there yet be very heavy and terrible in a mans feeling and apprehension so sin pardoned is said to be covered or hid not in respect of us as if it were taken from our sight but from Gods sight and he is said to cast our sins behinde his back not ours The third reason This Explication as the whole sense of the Petition would overthrow all other places of Scripture which make no pardon of sin to be but where the subject hath such qualifications as this in the Text of forgiving others it is not indeed put as a cause or merit but yet it is as a qualification of the subject therefore our Saviour repeateth this again Except ye forgive others neither will my heavenly Father forgive you So Act. 10.43 Whosoever believeth on him shall have remission of sins Rom. 3.15 He is a propitiation through faith in his bloud here faith is made an instrument to apply and bring that pardon to the soul which it had not before So 1 Joh. 1.9 If we confesse our sins he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins By these and the like Scriptures it is plain That remission of sin is given us only in the use of these graces not that hereby we merit at Gods hand or that God is tied to these wayes but it is here as in the Sacraments he hath tied himself to convey his graces in no other chanels or conduits then he hath appointed Lastly This would make no difference between sins repented of and not repented of for if they be all pardoned from eternity then sins that are humbled for and that are unhumbled for have the like consideration on Gods part and I may feel the pardon of the latter though not repented of as well as the former yea I may have the sense of the pardon of all the sins I shall commit for the future and so whereas I pray for daily bread not to-morrow bread I shall here beg for the sense of the pardon not only of my sins to day but tomorrow and the next year But I never read that God made such a Jubile as one Pope did who promised a plenary Indulgence not only for sins past but afore-hand also for all sins to come God doth not antidate his pardon before the sin be committed or repented of but of this more largely in time 6. We pray That as God doth forgive the sin so also he would release the punishments and take away all the wrath that doth belong to it It is a mockery which Papists make about pardon as if indeed God did pardon the sin but the punishment that abideth still and we must work out a release from that by our own selves It is true as we have proved God though he doth pardon sin yet he may grievously afflict but these are fatherly chastisements not judicial punishments but in this Prayer we desire also that as the sins are removed so also whatsoever troubles afflictions and chastisements do remain that they also may be taken away that as the gulf of hell is removed so every cloud also may be dispelled 7. In this Petition we pray That God would deliver us from those effects of sin which God hath immutably set upon it such as are sicknesses death and corruption For although God by vertue of the Covenant of Grace hath promised a perfect pardon of sin yet we cannot come to a full enjoyment of all those priviledges which remission of sin doth bring till we be freed from death and corruption So that as long as there is the death and grave still sin hath some power We therefore pray that whatsoever mortality and corruption sin hath brought in it may be taken away and we made fit for eternal life which is the consequent of pardon of sin for you must know that pardon is not a meer privative mercy freeing us from Gods wrath but there is also a positive investing of us with a title to everlasting life and glory only our corruptibility hinders us from the actual possession of that which we have a right unto we therefore pray That as God removed our sins so he would also remove all the sad effects and mischievous fruit which came in by it 8. We pray not only for pardon of sin but also for the good concomitants and effects of it which are Peace with God and Joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 5.1 Hence Luther speaketh of a twofold pardon one secret and hidden when he forgiveth sins but the people of God do not feel or regard it The other is open and experimental now both these condonations are necessary The first saith he is more bitter and troublesome but more
may easily see which of these two Justification or Remission of sinne is The first and proper difference is this An immanent action is that which abides in God so that it works no reall effect without As when God doth meerly know or understand a thing but a transient action is when a positive change is made thereby in a creature as in Creation c. So that we may conclude of all Gods actions which do relate to believers only predestination is an immanent act of God and all the rest Justification Regeneration Glorification are transient acts for Predestination though it be an act of God choosing such an one to happinesse yet it doth not work any reall change or positive effect in a man unlesse we understand it virtually for it is the cause of all those transient actions that are wrought in time Howsoever therefore Justification be called by some an immanent action and so made to go before Faith and Repentance as if Faith were onely a declaration and signe of pardon of sinne from all eternity yet that cannot be made good as is to be shewed A second difference floweth from the other An immanent action is from eternity and the same with Gods essence but a transient action is the same with the effect produced Hence the Orthodox maintain That Gods decrees are the same with his nature Hence when we speak of Gods willing such a thing it is no more then his divine Essence with an habitude and respect to such objects Gods Decrees are no more then God decreeing Gods will no more then God willing otherwise the simpliciy of Gods nature will be overthrown and those volitions of God will be created entities and so must be created by other new volitions and so in infinitum as Spanheimius well argueth only the later part seemeth not to be strong or sufficient because when man willeth he doth not will that by a new volition and so in infinitum and why then would such a thing follow in God Besides its no such absurdity in the actings of the soul to hold a progresse in infinitum thus far that it doth not determinately pitch or end at such an act It is one thing to have things distinguished in God and another thing for us to conceive distinctly of them The former is false The later is true and necessary But with transient actions it is otherwise they being the same with the effects produced are in time And this is a perpetual mistake in the Antinomian to confound Gods Decree and Purpose to justifie with Justification Gods immanent action from all eternity with that transient which is done in time Whereas if they should do thus in matters of Sanctification and Glorification it would be absurd to every mans experience whereas indeed a man may as truly say That his body is glorified from all eternity as that his sins are forgiven from all eternity And certainly Scripture speaks for one as well as the other when it saith Whom he hath justified them he hath glorified By these two differences you may see That pardon of sin is a transient action and so Justification also partly because it leaveth a positive real effect upon a man justified he that was in the state of hatred is hereby in a state of love and friendship he hath peace with God now that once was at variance with him Now when we say There is a change made in a man by Justification it is not meant of an inward absolute and physical one such as is in Sanctification when of unholy we are made holy but morall and relative as when one is made a Magistrate or husband and wife partly because this is done to us in time whereas immanent actions were from all eternity and therefore it would be absurd to pray for them as it is ridiculous for a man to pray he may be predestinated or elected Some indeed have spoken of Predestination as actus continuus a continued act and so with them it is good Divinity Si non sis praedestinatus ora ut praedestineris If thou beest not predestinated pray that thou maiest be but this is corrupt doctrine and much opposeth the Scripture which doth frequently commend election from the eternity of it that it was before the foundations of the world were laid whereas now for pardon of sinne it is our duty to pray that God would do it for us This being thus cleared we come to answer the next Question depending upon this viz. Whether God doth justifie or forgive our sins before we believe or repent and our answer is negative That God doth not Although there are many who are pertinacious that he doth and so they make Faith not an instrumental cause to apply pardon but only a perswasion that sin is pardoned and thus repentance shall not be a condition to qualifie the subject to obtain forgiveness but a sign to manifest that sin is forgiven This Question is of great practical concernment and therefore to establish you in the truth consider these Arguments 1. The Scripture speaks of a state of wrath and condemnation that all are in before they be justified or pardoned Therefore the believers sins were not from all eternity forgiven for if there were a time viz. before his Regeneration and Conversion that he was a childe of wrath under the guilt and punishment of sin then he could not be at the same time in the favour of God and peace with him Now the Scripture doth plentifully shew That even believers before their Regeneration are detained in such bonds and chains of guilt and Gods displeasure Ephes 2.1 2 3. There the Apostle speaking to the converted Ephesians telleth them of the wretched and cursed condition they were once in and he reckons himself amongst them saying They were children of wrath and that even as others were So that there is no difference between a godly man unconverted and a wicked man for that present state for both are under the power of Satan both walk in disobedience both are workers of iniquity and so both are children of wrath It is true the godly man is predestinated and so shall be brought out of this state and the other left in it But predestination as is more largely to be shewed being an immanent act in God doth denote no positive effect for the present of love upon the person and therefore he being not justified hath his sins imputed to him lying upon him and therefore by the Psalmists argument not a blessed man This also 1 Cor. 6.9 10 11. The Apostle saith of some Corinthians That they were such as abiding in that state could not inherit the kingdom of God and such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are justified Therefore there was a time when these Corinthians were not justified but had their sins abiding on them Likewise all the places of Scripture which speak of Gods wrath upon wicked men and that
they have no peace with God must needs be true of all godly men while unconverted He that believeth not hath not life and the wrath of God abideth on him and without faith it is impossible to please God Now who can deny but that this is true of Paul while no believer but an opposer of godlinesse The Psalmist also saith God is angry with the wicked every day Was not this true of Manasses before his conversion It must therefore be a very poisonous Doctrine to say That God is as well pleased with a man before his conversion as after 2. If the Scriptures limit this priviledge of Justification and pardon only to those subjects that are so and so qualified then till they be thus furnished they cannot enjoy those priviledges The places are many which testifie this Act. 3.19 Repent that your sins may be blotted out Therefore their sins stood uncancelled as so many Debts in Gods register Book till they did repent Act. 26.18 To turn them from darknesse to light from the power of Satan to God that they may receive forgivenesse of sins Therefore they had it not while under the power of darknesse 1 Joh. 1.9 If we confesse our sins he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins which supposeth That God doth forgive our sins only when we confesse and forsake them Matth. 6.15 If ye forgive not neither will my heavenly Father forgive you It is in vain to number up more places for these do necessarily prove sinne is not forgiven till Faith and Repentance They do not indeed argue a causality or merit yet they infer a necessary presence in those that obtain pardon and do hold by the same proportion as those places which require Sanctification before Glorification 3. Where the Scripture requireth many things to the obtaining of any speciall benefit there that benefit cannot be said to be enjoyed till all those things be brought about Now the Word of God speaks of several things required to pardon of sin There is the Grace and mercy of God as the efficient cause Psal 51.1 Isa 43.25 Rom. 3.25 2. There is requisite the bloud of Christ as the meritorious cause for there can be no remission of sins without effusion of bloud Rom. 3.25 1 Cor. 15.3 Heb. 1.3 1 Joh. 4.10 3. There is Faith required as an instrumental cause Act. 26.18 Rom. 3.25 Now although an instrumentall cause have not that worth or excellency as the efficient and meritorious have yet it is as necessary in the way of an instrument as the others are in their respective causalities so that as a man may not from those places which speak of Gods grace inferre therefore remission of sins is before Christs death So neither may a man argue because Christ died to take away our sins therefore these are taken away before we believe So that this Argument may fully establish us We see the Scripture speaking of three causes cooperant to pardon of sin therefore I may not conclude the effect is wrought till all those causes be And as the Scripture speaks of these causes so as you heard of many qualifications in the subject Insomuch that it is so far from being a duty to believe our sins were pardoned from all eternity antecedently to faith and repentance that we are undoubtedly to believe they were not If the King proclaim a pardon to every one that shall humble himself and seek it out If the Physician prepare a potion for the patient to receive it shall any man say because of those causal preparations that either the one is pardoned or the other healed before their particular application of those things 4. If our sins be pardoned antecedently to our Faith and Repentance then all those effects which are inseparable in the least moment of time from Justification are also antecedent to our Faith and Repentance But it is evident by experience that is not so It is a clear truth That Sanctification of our natures is individually conjoyned one with the other So that although there be a priority of nature yet they are together in time God pardons no mans sins whom he doth not heal Rom. 8.1 1 Joh. 1.9 Psal 32.2 A man may be justified and not glorified but not justified and unregenerated Then if so a man shall be at the same time unconverted and converted at the same time a member of Christ and a member of the devil and so as they say we are justified only declaratively in our own consciences so we shall be regenerated and converted only declaratively Again where sins are pardoned there is blessednesse as the Psalmist speaks then I may call Paul a blessed Persecutor Manasses a blessed murderer for they had no sin imputed to them at that time Besides those whose sins are pardoned may boldly go to the throne of grace and call God Father all which are contrary to the whole tenour of Scripture which expostulateth with men for taking his name or words into their mouth and hate to be reformed yet a Doctor of this Antinomian sour leaven affirmeth boldly That God doth love us as well before conversion as after That God did love Paul with as great a love when he persecuted the Church as when he preached the Gospel How must this devour up all godlinesse when I may have the same faith and confidence in God for pardon in the acting of flagitious crimes as well as out of them in prayer and humiliation and if he may have the same faith why not then the same consolations and joy in conscience 5. If Justification do antecede our Faith so that Faith doth only declare our pardon of sin then any other grace may be said to justifie as well as Faith For take any other grace repentance humility joy these are all the fruits of Gods Spirit and so demonstrate his election of us his justification of us But how unanswerably do the Orthodox prove a peculiar instrumental vertue in faith for pardon which others have not The Apostle expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through faith in his bloud not love of his bloud and indeed the Apostle maintaineth that Gospel-position against false teachers viz. That we are justified by Faith not by works The Question was not Whether the works of the Law did justifie us declaratively only but causally So then by this Doctrine Faith must no more be called the hand or the eating and drinking of Christs body and bloud but only made a sign of such mercies 6. If pardon of sin be from all eternity going before our Faith and Repentance because of Gods election then it must also be antecedent to the death and obedience of Christ So that not only our tears but Christs bloud shall be excluded from this great favor The reason is plain Because Gods predestination and election is antecedent to Christ yea Christ is a fruit of our election so that the Orthodox maintain against Arminians though we be chosen
Scripture less loving is called hating sometimes as the Learned observe Neither doth this make any change in God it only denoteth a change in the creature as hereafter is to be shewed So that the gross mistake as if Ele●tion were all love actually and expresly and the confounding of the love of God as an immanent act in him with the effects of this love hath made several persons split upon rocks of errors But how love and anger are in God is more exactly to be examined when we speak of the meritorious cause of Justification which is Christs merits for indeed this Argument from Election will as well put in for a Justification before any consideration of Christ as well as of Faith if every thing be duely weighed as in that part God willing is to he shewed where also the distinctions about Gods love are to be considered of Some making a general love and a special love others a first love and a second or one flowing from the first others a love of benevolence or beneficence and of complacency But of these in their proper place We proceed and in the next place we will put his fourth and sixth Argument together being both grounded upon this That Christ by his death gave a full satisfaction to God and God accepted of it whereby Christ is said so often to take away our sins and we to be cleansed by his bloud This Argument made the learned Pemble pag. 25. to hold out Justification in Gods sight long before we were born as being then purchased by Christs death otherwise he thinks we must with the Arminians say Christ by his death made God placabilem reconcilable not placatum reconciled No saith he it is otherwise the ransome demanded 〈◊〉 paid and accepted full satisfaction to the divine Justice is given and taken all the sins of the Elect all actually pardoned This is a great oversight For first Though Christ did lay down a price and the Father accept of it yet both agreed in a way and order when this benefit should become theirs who are partakers of it and that is when they believe and repent Now Bonum est ex integris causis if God the Fathers Covenant be to give pardon for Christs sake to those that do believe which faith also is the fruit of Christs death then may we not separate Christ from faith no more then faith from Christ or God the Fathers love from both If Christ had died for such a man to have his sins pardoned whether he had faith in him or no then this Argment would have stood firm God then did accept of Christs death and becomes reconciled but in that order and way which he hath appointed 2. This Argument doth interf●re with that of Election for there pardon of sin doth take its rise from Election but here from the time God laid our sins upon Christ And indeed the Antinomians are at a variance amongst themselves some fetching the original of pardon from one way and some from another 3. We do not say That faith is the condition of Christs acquiring pardon but of the application of pardon Faith doth not make Christs merits to be merits or his satisfaction to be satisfaction This ariseth from the dignity and worth of Christ It would be an absurd thing to say That faith is the cause why God doth accept of Christs merits and receiveth a satisfaction by him This were to make the instrumental cause a meritorious cause The Arminians they make Christ to have purchased pardon upon condition of believing which believing they do not make a benefit by Christs death yea they say Nihil ineptius nibil vanius nothing is more foolish and vain then to do so Now this indeed is an execrable errour to hold Christ died only to make a way for reconciliation which reconciliation is wholly suspended upon a mans faith and that faith comes partly from a mans will and partly from grace not being the fruit of Christs death as wel as remission of sins it self But we say a far different thing Christ satisfied Gods wrath so that God becomes reconciled and gives pardon but in the method and way he hath appointed which is faith and this faith God will certainly work in his due time that so there may be an instrument to receive this pardon For the opening of this when it is said Christ satisfied Gods wrath this may have a different meaning either that Christ absolutely purchased reconciliation with the Father whether they believe or no without any condition at all as Joab obtained Absoloms reconciliation with David or Esther the Jews deliverance of Ahashu●rosh Or with a condition In the former sense it cannot be said because the fruits of Christs death are limited only to believers If with a condition then either Antecedent which is to be wrought by us that so we may be partakers of his death and that cannot be because it is said He died for us while sinners and enemies And this is Arminianism for by this means only a gate is set open for salvation but it may happen that no man may enter in or else this condition is Concomitant or consequent viz. A qualification wrought by the Spirit of Christ whereby we are enabled to receive of those benefits which come by his death And in this sense it is a truth and by this the foundation of the Opponent is totally razed For Christ took away the sins of those for whom he died and reconciled them to God and this absolutely if by it we understand any condition anteceding to be done by us but not absolutely if it exclude a condition that is consequently wrought by the Spirit of God to apply the fruits of Christs death so that the actual taking away of sins is not accomplished till the person for whom he died be united to him by Faith Hence the Scripture speaks differently about Christs death sometimes it saith He died for us sinners and enemies and in other places John 15.13 He layeth down his life for his friends and his sheep Joh. 17.19 He saith he prayeth and sanctifieth himself for those that shall believe in him viz. in a consequent sense for those who by faith shall lay hold on his death So that faith hath a two-fold condition the first of the time when sins are taken away by Christs death and that is when they believe 2. Of whom these priviledges are true and that is of such who do believe Now all this may be the further cleared if we consider what kinde of cause Christs death is to take away our sins It is a meritorious cause which is in the rank of moral causes of which the rule is not true Positâ causâ sequitur effectus The cause being the effect presently followeth This holdeth in natural causes which necessarily produce their effects but moral causes work according to the agreement and liberty of the Persons that are moved thereby As for
with drossy errors or the childrens necessary food mingled with destructive poyson Truth is a Depositum Aristotle doth rationally conclude That it is a greater injustice to deny a little thing deposited then a great summe that we are indebted for because he that depositeth any thing in our custody trusteth in us as a faithfull friend the other expecteth only justice from us Now of all points of Divinity there is none that with more profit and comfort we may labour in then in that o● Justification which is stiled by some articulus stantis cadentis ecclesiae The Church stands or fals as the truth of this is asserted and a modest sober vindication of this point from contrary errors will not hinder but much advantage the affectionate part of a man even as the Bee is helped by her sting to make honey Gods way of Justification is for the truth of it above naturall reason and therefore there is required a supernatural Revelation to manifest it Insomuch that the Divine Authority of the Scripture is in nothing more irradiant then in the discovery of this glorious way of our Justification But it hath been a stumbling block and a rock of offence to many mens hearts who look for a Philosophicall Justification or righteousnesse of works either wholly issuing from our free will as they suppose or partly from it and partly from the grace of God and on this hand have erred the Pelagians Papists Arminians and Socinians But while the Orthodox have been diligent to keep this fountain pure from the filth those Philistims daily threw in There arose up another error on the right hand which the Apostle Paul in his Epistles doth many times Antidote aga●nst viz. such a setting up of Free-Grace in Justification that should make the Law as to all purposes uselesse and while it extolleth pr●viledges debases duties That as the Arminians on the one side think it most absurd that the same thing should be officium requisitum donum promissum a duty required on our part and yet a gift promised on Gods part So on the other side the Antinomian cannot at the same time see the fulnesse of Grace only in blotting out our sins and yet at the same time A necessity of repentance without which this Justification could not be obtained Hence it is they fix their Meditations and Discourses upon the promissory part of the Scripture not at the same time attending to the preceptive part But whether it be their weaknesse or their wilfulnesse they seem to be upon those passages of Scripture which speak of Gods grace and Christs satisfaction as David in Sauls arms which were an hinderance not an advantage to him Men destitute of sound knowledge and Learning should be afraid lest they doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 3.16 wrest the Scripture and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to their own destruction It is no lesse a sin saith Oecumenius to torture the Scripture by perverse interpretation then it was to torment and Crucifie the very bodies of the Apostles but to how many ignorant men attempting beyond their strength in Controversies of Divinity hath that faln out which did to one Lucian speaks of who finding Orpheus his harp consecrated to Apollo in a certain Temple bribed the Priest of the Temple thinking to make the same melody which Orpheus used to do which he attempting through his ignorance made such an horrid sound that it inraged all the dogs neer him which presently fell on him and tore him in pieces It is therefore good for men in all humility and modesty not to think of themselves above what they ought or to affect to be Doctors before indeed they have been Disciples But to my matter in hand I shall briefly give an account of my method in this Treatise Whereas in Justification many things are considerable the efficient and impulsive Cause Gods grace the meritorious Cause Christs satisfaction the instrumentall Cause Faith and ev●ry one of these hath many Debates upon it by Learned men Yet I have insisted upon that where●n the nature of it doth consist and because that is made by some two fold partly in remission of sins partly in imputation of Christs righteousnesse this Discourse is wholly upon the former indeavouring to clear all the Doctrinal and Practical doubts that are of greatest consequence in this matter And if God should blesse this part with any good successe to establish the mindes of those that waver I shall with Gods assistance proceed to the other point viz. The Imputation of Christs righteousnesse the mistaking of which point is no mean cause of Antinomianism I am not ignorant how subject to blindnesse and severall imperfections the best of men are whereby through after-thoughts they see such an argument might have been more strongly managed and such expressions better ordered insomuch that most men may say as Luther said of his Books He could like Saturn eat up his own children It is also to be considered how difficult it is with pure ends and godly intentions aiming only at the glory of God and edification of others to undertake such a businesse as this is therefore in all these exercises it is good to go out of our selves depending upon the strength of God only and not to boast as if we had not received Tutius vivitur quando totum Deo damus Et in nihilo gloriandum est quia nihil nostrum est One thing more I am to inform thee of which is that in the former part of this treatise I have more remisly spoken of Justification in the generall because that will more pertinently be handled in the other point of imputed righteousnesse and have indeavoured more vigorously to prosecute the other part which is wholly spent about pardon of sin These things premised I leave thee to the Lord who teacheth his children to profit Thine in Christ Jesus Anthony Burgess THE CONTENTS WHy the doctrine of justification ought to be kept pure pag. 3 2 Propositions clearing the nature of justification 3 4 3 What is implied in justification 6 7 4 What cautions are to be observed to conceive the nature of justification 14 5 Wherein justification consists 17 6 Propositions for the understanding remission of sins 18 7 How sins may be said to be forgiven ibid. 8 How sin is to be considered when it is said to be forgiven 19 9 What it is to have sin forgiven 20 10 How afflictions come upon Gods people after their sin is pardoned 24 11 Whether God corrects his people for sin 26 12 How the Antinomians prove that God doth not chastise his people for their sins 34 13 Whether any absurdities follow upon that doctrine that God doth correct his people for their sins 39 14 What errors the Antinomians hold concerning remission of sinne 43 15 How it may be proved that God doth see sin in a beleever so as to be offended with it 53 16 How great the guilt of
sin in the beleever is in the sight of God 69 17 How Gods anger manifesteth it self upon his children when they sinne pag. 75 18 What kinde of sins God is displeased with 79 19 How God manifesteth his displeasure against his people in spirituall and eternall things 82 20 How the Antinomian would prove that God doth not see sinne in a justified person 88 21 How the Antinomian distinguisheth between Gods knowing and seeing of sin ibid. 22 How seeing is attributed to God 89 23 How Gods knowledge and ours do differ ibid. 24 How the Antinomians are contrary to themselves 93 25 How farre Gods taking notice of sinne so as to punish it is subject to the meer liberty of his will 95 26 How freedome may be extended to God 96 27 How the attributes of God and the actions of them differ in respect of freedome 97 28 How Gods justice essentially and the effects of it differ 100 29 How Christ satisfied God 101 30 How afflictions on Beleevers can agree with Gods justice ibid. 31 Why sins are called debts 105 32 What in sin is a debt ibid. 33 What is meant by that petition Forgive us 113 34 Whether we pray for the pardon it self or for the sense thereof only 4 Reasons proving the affirmative 116 35 What is implied in the petition Forgive us our debts 121 1 In the subject who doth pray ibid. 2 In the matter praied for 126 3 In the person to whom we pray 128 36 How sin a considered 130 37 How all sin is voluntary 132 38 Whether sin be an infinite evil 138 39 What remission of sin is 139 40 Why repentance and faith is pressed as necessary 146 41 How our repentance consists with Gods free grace in pardoning of sin 147 42 How many doe mistake concerning repentance p. 150 43 Why God requires repentance seeing it is no cause of pardon 157 44 Why repentance wrought by the spirit of God is not enough to remove sin in the guilt of it 161 45 Why repentance should not be as great a good and as much honour God as sin is an evil 163 46 What harm comes to God by sin ibid. 47 What kinde of act Forgivenesse of sin is and whether it be antecedent to our faith and repentance 166 48 Whether justification precede faith and repentance 176 49 Whether infants have actuall faith and are Beleevers 181 50 How we are sinners in Adam 185 51 How an elect person unconverted and a reprobate differ and what kinde of love election is 188 52 Whether in that petition Forgive us our debts we pray for pardon or for assurance only 196 53 Why God doth sometimes pardon sinne not acquainting the person with it 200 54 What directions should be given to a soul under temptation about pardon of sin 203 55 Whether a Beleever repenting is to make difference between a great sin and a lesser 205 56 What is meant by covering of sin 216 57 How God by pardoning sin is s●id to cover it 217 58 Whether the phrase of Gods covering sin imply that he doth not see it 219 59 How sins being in justified persons can stand with the omnisciency truth and holinesse of God 220 60 How God doth see sin in beleevers when they have the righteousnesse of Christ to cover it 221 61 How a face is attributed to God 226 62 What sins Gods children may fall into 230 63 How the sinnes of Gods people and of the reprobate differ 234 64 How farre grosse sinnes make a breach upon justification 236 65 Why the guilt of new grosse sinnes doth not take away justification p. 245 66 Whether God in pardoning doth not forgive all sins together 246 67 Wherein the compleatnesse of the pardon of sin at the day of judgement consists 262 68 Whether the sins of Gods people shall be manifested at the last day 264 69 Whether we are justified in Christ before we beleeve as we are accounted sinners in Adam before we actually sinned 186 70 Whether reconciliation purchased by Christs death doth necessarily inferre justification before faith 190 OF JUSTIFICATION LECTURE I. ROM 3.24 25. Being justified freely by his Grace c. THE Apostle in the words precedent laid down two Propositions to debase man and all his works that so he might make way for the exaltation of that grace of justification here spoken of The first Proposition is that By the deeds of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight where two things are observable 1. That he cals every man by the word Flesh which is emphaticall to beat down that pride and tumor which was in the Jews 2. He addeth in his sight which supposeth that though our righteousnesse among men may be very glorious yet before God it is unworthy The other Proposition is that All come short of the glory of God Some do make it a Metaphor from those in a race who fall short of the prize Whether by the glory of God be meant the image of God and that righteousnesse first put into us or eternall life or which is most probable matter of glorying and boasting before God which the Apostle speaks of afterwards is not much materiall Now the Apostle having described our condition to be thus miserable he commends the Grace of God in justifying of us which is decyphered most exactly in a few words so that you have in the Text a most compendious delineation of justification First There is the benefit set down being justified Secondly The efficient cause Gods Grace and here we have a two-fold impulsive cause one inward denoted in the word Freely the other outward in the meritorious cause Christs death which is further illustrated by the appointment of God for this end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some understand this of Gods manifestation as if it were spoken to oppose the propitiatory in the Ark which was left hidden some to the whole polity in the Old Testament which in the Legal shadows and the Prophets predictions did declare Christ Others upon better ground refer it to the Decree of God This death of Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which denoteth both the action it self as also the effect and benefit which cometh by it Chrysostome observeth that it is called redemption and not a simple emption because we were the Lords once but by our sins became slaves to Satan and now God doth make us his again In the third place you have the instrumentall cause Faith in his bloud this is that Hysop that doth sprinkle the bloud though it be contemptible in it self yet it is instrumentall for a great good and hereby is denoted That Faith hath a peculiar nature in this work of Justification which no other grace hath for none saith Love in his bloud or Patience in his bloud Lastly here is the final cause To declare the righteousnesse of God for the remission of sins past Some observe those words sins past as implying no sinne is
many other places do abundantly prove that there is not forgivenes but where there is repentance Therefore look upon all those doctrines as false and dangerous which make justification to be before it Not that we do with Papists make any merit or causality in repentance or that we limit it to such a measure and quantity of repentance nor as if we made it the condition of the Covenant of Grace but only the way without which not the cause for which remission of sins is not obtained neither can there be any instance given of men forgiven without this repentance and the same likewise is affirmed of faith though faith is in another notion then repentance this being the instrument to apply and receive it But of this hereafter 9. This remission of sin is not limited to persons times or the quantity and quality of sins Indeed the sin against the holy Ghost cannot be forgiven we will not explain that cannot by difficulty as if indeed it might be forgiven but very hardly The ordinary answer is that therefore it cannot be forgiven because the person so sinning will not confesse humble himself and seek pardon God is described by pardoning iniquity transgressions and sins Christ is said to take away the sin of the world David and Peters sins were voluntary yet God forgave them LECTURE IV. ROM 3.24 25. Being Iustified freely by his grace c. THe Doctrine about remission of sin being thus particularly declared we come to that great Question How afflictions come upon the godly after the pardon of their sins For the Antinomian goeth into one extremity and the Papist into another so true is that of Tertullian Christ is alwayes crucified between two thieves that is Truth suffers between two extream errors Therefore in prosecuting this point which is of great practical concernment I will lay down First What the Antinomian saith Secondly What the Papist And lastly What the Orthodox The Antinomian in his book called the Honey-Comb of Justification explaineth himself in these particulars by which you may judge that his Honey is Gall. Having made this Objection to himself That the children of God are corrected by God therefore he seeth sin in them maketh a large Answer Distinguishing first of afflictions calling some Legal and some Evangelical and then he distinguisheth of Persons making some unconverted others converted the unconverted again he makes to be either such as are reprobate or else elected now saith he the legal crosses have a two-fold operation either vindicative or corrective Vindicative are such afflictions as God executeth upon the wicked and reprobates in which sense God is called the God of vengeance Corrective are such lashes of the Law as are executed upon those persons that are the children of God by election but not yet converted and so under the Law therefore these afflictions are not in wrath to confound them but in mercy to prepare them to their conversion for God seeing sins in them layeth crosses upon them Now these elect persons he cals unconverted actively and declaratively in a very ambiguous and suspicious manner as if conversion were from all eternity as well as Justification so that as they say a man in time is justified only declaratively being indeed so from all eternity thus he must be said to be converted and if this be true then it will likewise follow that a man in heaven is glorified likewise onely declaratively but actually and indeed glorified from all eternity even while he is in this miserable house of clay In the next place he comes to Evangelical crosses which fall upon them that are actively and declaratively as he cals it converted and these he denieth expresly to be for their sins for this were saith he to deny Christs satisfactory punishment because by his death we have not one spot of sin in us therefore he makes them to be only the tryal of their faith and to exercise their faith so that by his divinity when a godly man is afflicted the flesh would indeed perswade a man hath sin in him but this is to try whether thou canst beleeve thou art cleansed from sin for all these afflictions Therefore if any man yield to this temptation viz. that he hath sin in him when he is afflicted what is this saith he but to deny Christ and his bloud Think you this to be the voice of the Scriptures Hence he laboureth to shew that twelve absurdities would follow from this doctrine of Gods afflicting his children for their sins the strength of which shall be in his place considered I have now only laid down his judgement and he makes the Doctrine of the Protestants opposing this to be Popish and confounding the Law and the Gospel together Hence intending the Protestant Authors and Ministers he saith They paint God like an angry father ever seeing sin in us and ever standing with a rod and staff in his hand lifted up over our heads with which by reason he seeth sins in us he is ever ready though not to strike us down yet to crack our crowns and sorely to whip us whereas the Gospel describeth him to be not only a loving Father but also our well-pleased Father at perfect peace with us so that the upshot of his position is to shew that they are taskmasters and do degenerate to the legall teaching in the Old Testament whosoever preach that God doth correct Believers for their sins and I have saith he somewhat the more largely hunted this Fox because it is so nourished not only by the Papists but also some of us Protestants who by lisping the language of Ashdod do undermine the very roots of the Lords vine And that you may see it is not one mans judgement amongst them see what their great General saith in a Sermon pag. 162. Know this that at that instant when God brings afflictions upon thee he doth not remember any sin of thine they are not in his thoughts towards thee Again whatsoever things befall the children of God are not punishments for sins they are not remembrances of sin and if men or Angels shall endeavor to contradict this let them be accounted as they deserve Thus the Antinomian The Papist goeth into another extremity for thus they hold Bellar de poen lib. 4. cap. 1 2. That when God hath forgiven a sin yet it is according to his Justice that the sinner should suffer or do something to satisfie this justice not in respect of the sin as it is against God for although some say so yet others reject it but in respect of some temporal punishment either in this life or in the life to come which is the ground of Purgatory And that this may be made good they say When God doth forgive a sin he doth not presently remit the temporal punishment therefore men may by some satisfactory penalties voluntarily taken upon themselves rescue themselves from these temporal punishments Now this is a
of Instruction to the godly Observ It is the duty of justified persons to pray for forgivenesse of their sins The meaning of the Petition Forgive us c. 1 ●hat God w●uld not require of us the satisfaction of his justice for our sins 2 That God would lay our sins on Christ A two-fold diff●rence between Gods forgiving our sins and our forgiving others 3. As we pray for justification so for the continuance in it 4. We pray for daily renewed acts of pardon and imputation of Christs righteousnesse Bell●rmines objection answered 5. We pray for the sense of this pardon in our consciences more and more We pray for pardon it self and not for the sense thereof only Reasons proving this Reas 1. Reas ● Reas 3. Reas 4. 6 We pray that as God forgives the sin so he would release the punishm●nt 7 We pray to be delivered from the effects of sin 8 We pray for pardon and the concomitants thereof Three things implied in this Petition 1. On the part of the subject or he who praieth is implied 1 That all men are sinfull 2. A sense of sin within us 3 Godly sorrow for sin 4 Earnest perseverance till we obtain 5 Constant renewed acts of faith 3 In the object or matter pra●ed for are impl●ed 1 That f●rg●ven●ss of sin may he had after B●ptism 2 That a remission of great sins may be hoped for 3 That there is an iteration of pardon 3 In the person to whom we pray are implied 1 That God only can forgive sins 2 That he takes notice of sin Vse Sin considered ●our vvayes 1 Abstractedly in its own nature The nature of sin expressed in the severall names of it 2 In the definition of it Hovv all sin is voluntary 2 Of sin relating to the person sinning A man possibly may not or rather form●lly cannot intend sinne 3 The proper eff●ct of sinne which is to make guilty Whence comes 1 A st●in upon the so●l taken out by sanctification Liv. de Rec. ● An o●●igation to ●t●r●●l ●●●shment 〈◊〉 by re●ission Sin considered as an ●ffence to God Whether sin b● an infinite evil Vse What remission of sin is From the names of it Propos 1. Propos 2. Propos 3. Propos 4. Propos 5. Propos 6. Object Answ Vse How our duty of repentance consists with Gods free grace in remitting Propos 1. Propos 2. Propos 3. Propos 4. 5 Two great practical mistakes concerning repentance observed The first of the prophane man The second of the godly Propos 6. Propos 7. The scope of the whole Vse 1. Vse 2. Practical Objections concerning repentance Object 1. Of what use repentance may be Answ 1. Answ 2. Six Reasons of congruity betwixt repentance and remission Reas 1. Reas 2. Reas 3. Reas 4. Reas 5. The sixt Reason two ●old 1. In regard of Gods justice 2 In regard of his grace and mercy Object 2. Whether repentance of it self may not take away the guilt of sin Answ 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. Why repentance bears not the proportion in satisfaction that sin does in the offence Object 3. What harm to God in sin Answ By distinguishing Gods Attributes Vse 1. Vse 2. What kinde of act in God forgivenesse of sin is Two cautions concerning the workings of God 1. There are no accidents in him 2. No new will in him Differences between an immanent tra●sient action 1. An immanent action produceth no outward effec● * Ex●ra controversiam est remissionem peccatorum prout act●● est in D●o immanens antecedere nostram fidem resipiscentiam Twiss Vin. gr pag. 18. 2. An immanent action in God is from eternity Arguments proving our bel●ef and repentance antecedents of justification Argum. 1. Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Arg. 4. * Den reconcil with God p. 25 Arg. 5. Arg. 6. Den. Arg. 3. to prove we are justified before vve believe Arg. 7. Vse Whether Justification precede faith and repentance Arguments for the affirmative From authority of orthodox men What the opinion above-said may mean That so expounded it seemeth but weak for th●se Reasons Reas 1. Reas 2. * Den recon of man with God p. 3 4. Reas 3. 1. Argument f●om Infants * Neither may this seem such a wonder seei●g that the orthodox hold even in men grow● up the first grace is wrought in us as meer patients our understandings wils no waies antecedently concurring to it so that the grace of God is then wrought in us without us Argum 2. Arg. 5. Answ Arg. 7. Ans 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. Answ 4. Answ 5. An elect person unconv●r●ed and a reprobate in many things differ not As Argu. 4. and Argum. 6. Answ 1. Answ 2. Answ 3. A two fold condition of faith Arg. ult Answ Whether we pray here for Pardon or for Assurance of Pardon only The Answer to the Question propounded 1. Th●y who are assured of Pardon ought yet to pray 2. This Petition relates to four sorts of men 3 Assurance of pardon not the only thing prayed for proved by four Reasons Reas 1. Reas 2. Reas 3. Reas 4. The instance for the co●trary opinion answered Why God doth sometimes pardon sin not acquainting the sinner vvith it Reas 1. Reas 2. Reas 3. Reas 4. Reas 5. What directions should be given a soul under temptation about pardon of sin Direct 1. Direct 2. Direct 3. Whether in repentance the difference between great sins and Less is to be respected Propositions premised concerning this Qu●stion The Question stated in these Propositions following 1. This difference is to be attended in suing for pardon 2. In respect of humiliation 3. Gross sins procure wrath and hinder the consolations of Gods Spirit 4. Gross sins exclude from the society of the faithful 3 Some gross sins requste m●ny conditions before pardon 6 Grosse sins require a more intense act of faith to apply pardon Some particulars wherein no difference is to be put between great and lesser sins 1. In respect of the efficient cause of pardon 2. Nor in respect of the meritorious cause 3 Neither in the means of pardon 4. No difference to be made as to the state of just●fication Illustration The text contains a description of the pardon of sin 1 From several expressions to magnifie the mercy of it 2 From the adjunct of rem●ssion viz. blessednesse Observations raised from the Text. 1 That forgiveness of sin is a covering of sin What is meant by covering of sinne How God by p●rd●n is said to cover sin Some particulars not extended to in this phrase of covering sin Whether the phrase of Gods covering sinne favour the errour That God seeth not sinne in beleevers Answer negative Two Objections answered Object 1. Object 2. Answ Pardon of sin duly valued by those only who inwardly feel Gods anger against it Vse 1. Of the first Observation Vse 2. Vse 3. The text divided into tvvo Petitions A face attributed to God in a double sense Observation from the first Petition The aggravation of Davids sin in ten particulars The degrees of Davids repentance The te●t considered in the● What sins Gods children may fall into The sins of Gods people in what kinde to be ranked Differences between the sins of the godly and reprobate Differ 1. Differ 2. Differ 3. Vse How far grosse sins make a breach upon Justification Answered negatively The Question answered affirmatively Why the guilt of new gros●e sins doth not take avvay Justification The second Petition handled Whether God in pardoning do forgive all sins together Three things laid down by way of concession The Question held negatively upon these grounds Vse Observ Propositions laid down in prosecution of this Observat●on Wherein the compleatnesse of the pardon of sin at the day of judgement consisteth 1. In our sense of that pardon 2. In the accomplishment of all effects of pardon 3. Then no more iteration of pardon 4. Then justification shall be perfected Whether the sins of Gods people sh●ll be manifested at the last day Vse 1. Vse 2. An Entrance into the Text from the consideration of the history Two Questions resolved for cle●ring the Text. Answ 1 When this Penitents sinne was pardone● 2. Whether the expression in the text favour any causality in the Penitents love in reference to h●r pardon Observ 1. A two fold repe●ta●ce in Script●re The Observation proved from Scripture By reason Further evidence from experience Vse 1. To press this use upon us two things especially to be insisted upon 1. The doctrine of o●i●inal co●ruption 2. The strict obligation of the Law Vse 2.